By Joseph Bernard A. Marzan
On Thursday, Feb. 6, 2025, Congress buzzed with impeachment discussions. Senate President Francis Escudero announced that they would not address the case against Vice President Sara Duterte until they reconvene on June 2.
Meanwhile, members of the House of Representatives denied that their support of the impeachment was in exchange for political favors.
Escudero told the Kapihan sa Senado conference with the press on Thursday morning that their adjournment on Wednesday evening, Feb. 5, was according to their planned schedule.
They adjourned without tackling the Articles of Impeachment forwarded by the House of Representatives, which was received at around 5 p.m. on Wednesday.
This was in response to a reporter’s question to Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel III about why the impeachment case was not raised on the plenary floor after it was received.
He further explained that the Senate needs to be in session for the impeachment court to convene, as they would need to formally receive the impeachment complaint in plenary to kickstart the process.
“No one asked because [at the time it was received], the Senate plenary wasn’t officially informed regarding the impeachment complaint. It has to go through a process in accordance with the rules, practice, and procedure of the Senate regarding impeachment complaints,” Escudero said.
“There were no caucuses, there were no talks between Senate members regarding this or any other matter. Before we adjourned yesterday, on Tuesday, on Monday, even the past week, we had no formal talks regarding this,” he added.
He also remarked that the Senate cannot be rushed into tackling the matter immediately, citing the past impeachment trials against former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez in 2011 and the late former Chief Justice Renato Corona in 2012.
Gutierrez’s impeachment complaint was filed on March 26, 2011, and the trial began on May 19 of the same year, while Corona’s was filed on Dec. 13, 2011, and the trial began on Jan. 19, 2012.
“Based on precedent, the word ‘forthwith’ does not mean the morning after. […] For more than two months, the Secretary-General [of the House] did not forward [the impeachment complaints] to the Speaker’s office to refer to the House plenary and the committee on justice. Their rooms are just next to each other, just like in the Senate. Why are we being told to act in just a few hours?” he remarked.
“If they [the House of Representatives] went easy, maybe they have no basis to rush us, especially since it was the last day of session. It was sent to us at around 5 p.m.,” he added.
The Senate president said they may take steps while in recess, including reviewing the chamber’s impeachment rules, stressing the need for updates in several aspects.
These include adding requirements such as judicial affidavits, provisions and procedures for trial before a commissioner, and stable and strong pretrial procedures to ease the trial process.
“These are new procedures in the Rules of Court [by the Supreme Court] that were there before we instituted our rules on impeachment then, which we need to change. The Senate secretariat also needs to study the impeachment [complaint],” Escudero said.
Aside from these, there are still questions left to be answered by June 2, according to Escudero.
These include amendments to the impeachment rules, what specific changes will be made, and whether the impeachment court can proceed with 12 senators between the 19th and 20th Congresses in June and July, among others.
Escudero said he believes the impeachment court would carry over to the 20th Congress, citing an example from the United States and the country’s collegial courts.
“[The U.S. Senate] elects one-third of its membership at any one time, and there are still two-thirds left, so you can say that the Senate is a continuing body. The Philippine Senate has 12 [senators at a time], so there would be no majority or quorum left,” he said.
“Looking at collegial courts, because [impeachment] is not a typical function of the legislature. [An impeachment case] is not a typical bill in my view, that when a Congress ends, it has to be refiled and if not approved, needs to be approved again by both chambers,” he added.
NOTHING IN EXCHANGE
The House of Representatives also held a press conference at around the same time, with two of the 11 impeachment prosecutors, Representatives Lorenz Defensor (Iloilo–3rd District) and Ramon Rodrigo Gutierrez (1-Rider Partylist), along with Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong (Lanao del Sur–1st District).
Defensor shared Escudero’s view that the impeachment court may transcend between Congresses, but said it would depend on the Senate.
“What adjourned [on Wednesday] was our legislative calendar. It means that the exercise of our legislative power as a Congress has finished. An impeachment process is sui generis or a class of its own. It’s a different process. It’s with the Senate on how they interpret that,” he said.
Gutierrez stated that the House leadership is already preparing the impeachment secretariat to be ready should the Senate proceed with the trial in March or June.
Adiong said they respect Escudero’s position, expressing their willingness to wait for the Senate’s action on the matter.
‘RAILROADED’
For lawyer, political analyst, and Daily Guardian columnist Michael Henry Yusingco, the impeachment complaint seemed to have been railroaded, taking advantage of the last session day of Congress.
“When you look at the rules [of the House], the verification process for the members states that they have to face the [Secretary General of the House] and swear that they have read the complaint and that they attest to the veracity of the complaint. […] Did that happen? Where? There are 215 of them. Did they go to the SecGen one by one, or did they face him as a group? Were they able to read that complaint within one day? Those are substantive issues,” Yusingco said.
Yusingco cited two considerations for Escudero’s decision to set the Senate’s impeachment process to their reconvening on June 2—practical and political.
“They didn’t know that the impeachment complaint would be endorsed to them, so right now, the decision is that they have to work on becoming an impeachment court, and that takes a lot of work. They’re doing that now, but the actual impeachment trial will come after the reconvene on June 2,” he said.
“The timing is very unfavorable to those who filed the impeachment and favorable to Vice President Duterte. Because right now, the protagonists, the senators, and all other politicians, that’s what they’re thinking. ‘Will we support this or not?’ ‘Will this cost or gain us votes?’ The challenge now is politics and not the contents of the impeachment,” he added.
For now, he says it remains uncertain whether this will affect pro-Duterte senators, citing the strong survey performances of Senators Bong Go and Bato dela Rosa, who are running for reelection.
He said this will impact the electoral chances of reelectionist district representatives and party lists, as it may be perceived as a favor to the administration.
However, this may also affect opposition lawmakers, including party-list Reps. France Castro (ACT Teachers), Arlene Brosas (GABRIELA), and Percival Cendaña (Akbayan), who are all running in the upcoming elections.
“The issue with them, in my view, with the anti-Marcos people and groups, is now they’re being lumped with the administration. Whether they like it or not, the accusation is that they sold out, they’re hypocrites for sleeping with the enemy. The issue for them is how they defend themselves against that,” he said.
“The issue now is how they separate those two personalities—where they push for impeachment, which the administration is also doing, but still hold the administration accountable, so they won’t be lumped with the administration,” he added.
Yusingco said finishing the process would not be possible within the 19th Congress unless the Senate speeds it up, comparing it with the Corona impeachment trial, which took four months.
